From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dworman v. Tinton Falls

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Aug 21, 1981
180 N.J. Super. 366 (App. Div. 1981)

Opinion

Argued May 27, 1981 —

Decided August 21, 1981.

On appeal from the Tax Court, 1 N.J. Tax 445.

Before Judges BOTTER, KING and McELROY.

Leo Rosenblum argued the cause for appellant ( Rosenblum Rosenblum, attorneys).

Irving C. Marcus argued the cause for respondents ( Lasser, Hochman, Marcus, Guryan Kuskin, attorneys; Mr. Marcus and Helane Kipnees on the brief).


The municipality appeals from judgments of the Tax Court establishing assessments for 1974, 1975 and 1976 for the subject property, an office building largely occupied by the Federal Government. On this appeal the municipality contends that considerable evidence was presented which established a higher economic rent than the contract rent provided in the applicable lease; that the cost approach supports an economic rent of $7.25 per square foot; that the lack of demand for office space in Monmouth County is irrelevant in the case at hand, and that the limit on rent that the federal government imposed in soliciting bids is also immaterial.

The case presents a number of unique aspects which were carefully considered in Judge Andrew's opinion below. Ample credible evidence supports the result reached in the Tax Court, and, not persuaded by the contentions advanced on this appeal, we affirm substantially for the reasons given by Judge Andrew. Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of America, 65 N.J. 474, 483-484 (1974).


Summaries of

Dworman v. Tinton Falls

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Aug 21, 1981
180 N.J. Super. 366 (App. Div. 1981)
Case details for

Dworman v. Tinton Falls

Case Details

Full title:LESTER J. DWORMAN; L.J.D. ENTERPRISES, INC.; THE DWORMAN COMPANY OF N.J.…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Aug 21, 1981

Citations

180 N.J. Super. 366 (App. Div. 1981)
3 N.J. Tax 1
434 A.2d 1134

Citing Cases

Global Terminal v. Jersey City

The probative utility of an expert's opinion stands or falls on the facts offered in support of it, as well…

Atl. City Elec. Co. v. Twp. of Pennsville

"The cost approach is normally relied on to value special purpose property or unique structures for which…